State v. Wardall

• Decision Date: 21 July 1919
• Docket Number: 15324.
• Citation: 183 P. 67,107 Wash. 606
• Court: Washington Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE ex rel. PORT OF SEATTLE v. WARDALL, County Auditor (LIPPY Intervener.

183 P. 67

107 Wash. 606

STATE ex rel. PORT OF SEATTLE v. WARDALL, County Auditor (LIPPY Intervener.

No. 15324.

Supreme Court of Washington

July 21, 1919

Department 2.

Appeal from Superior Court King County; Mitchell Gilliam, Judge.

Mandamus by the State, on the relation of the Port of Seattle, against Norman M. Wardall, as County Auditor of King County, in which Thomas S. Lippy intervened. Writ granted, and defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded, with instructions to deny application for writ.

Fred C. Brown, Charles Ethelbert Claypool, and Peters & Powell, all of Seattle, for appellant.

Preston Thorgrimson & Turner, of Seattle, for respondent.

FULLERTON J.

The Legislature of the state of Washington, at its biennial session of 1911, provided for the formation of municipal corporations called port districts. Laws of 1911, p. 412; Rem. Code, § 8165-1 et seq. The act defined with much minuteness the powers and duties of such corporations, and provided that its powers should be exercised through a port commission consisting of three members, who, after the first election, should hold office for a term of three years. Section 5 of the act provided that such commissioners should 'serve without compensation.'

Pursuant to the provisions of the act, a port district was organized covering the territory comprising the county of King, called the 'port of Seattle.' Commissioners were duly elected for the terms prescribed, and they and their successors in office have continually since exercised the powers of the corporation.

In 1917 the Legislature passed an act amendatory of secion 5 of the original act; the amendment, in so far as it is pertinent to the question here presented, being as follows:

'All port commissioners shall serve without compensation save and except in port districts having a population of two hundred thousand (200,000) or more inhabitants, and in such port districts each commissioner shall receive a compensation of three thousand dollars ($3,000.00) per annum, said compensation to be paid monthly out of the funds of the port district, in the same manner as are the salaries of the employés of the port district, the population of a port district to be fixed and determined by the last official census of the United States for the purposes of this section. The foregoing provision relating to compensation of port commissioners is subject to the following proviso: The question of whether port commissioners in port districts having a population of two hundred thousand (200,000) or more inhabitants shall receive compensation as herein provided shall be submitted at the first general election after the organization of any port district having said population of two hundred thousand (200,000) or more inhabitants, or, in the case of any port district already established and having said population then at a special election of the said port district at the time of the next general county election in the county in which said port district is located, held after the taking effect of this act. There shall be printed on the ballot at such election the words 'In favor of compensation for port commissioners in the sum of three thousand dollars each per annum' and the words 'Against compensation for port commissioners in the sum of three thousand dollars each per annum.' If at such election the majority of the voters voting on said proposition shall vote in favor of such compensation, the port commissioners of such port district shall receive compensation in the sum of three thousand dollars per annum as provided herein and in any case where a port district with a population of two hundred thousand (200,000) or more inhabitants, is in existence at the time this act becomes effective and such port district votes for a compensation as hereinbefore provided, the port commissioners of such district elected and serving shall begin to receive compensation with the calendar month succeeding the month in which the vote is taken.' Laws 1917, p. 502, § 2.

Acting pursuant to the amendment, the question whether the port commissioners should receive compensation as authorized therein was submitted to the electors of the district at the general election held on November 5, 1918, at which election the vote was in favor of allowing compensation. At this time the port commissioners were C. E. Remsberg, whose term of office commenced on the second Monday in January, 1916, Robert Bridges, whose term of office commenced on the second Monday in January, 1917, and T. S. Lippy, whose term of office commenced on the second Monday in January 1918.

At the appropriate time following the election the port commissioners directed the county auditor of King county to draw warrants in favor of the then commissioners, in payment of the salaries allowed by the act for the month of December, 1918, the calendar month succeeding the month in which the vote was taken. The auditor, conceiving the act inoperative as to the commissioners in office, refused to comply with the order, whereupon the port instituted proceedings in mandate in the superior court of King county to compel him so to do. On the hearing the superior court granted a writ of mandate, and this appeal is from its order.

The auditor based his refusal to issue the warrants upon the Constitution of the state. The provisions cited as directly applicable are found in section 25 of article 2 and section 8 of article 11 of that instrument. These read:

'Sec. 25. The Legislature shall never grant any extra compensation to any public officer, agent, servant, or contractor after the services shall have been rendered or the contract entered into, nor shall the compensation of any public officer be increased or diminished during his term of office.'

'Sec. 8. The Legislature shall fix the compensation by salaries of all county officers, and of constables in cities having a population of five thousand and upwards, except that public administrators, surveyors, and coroners may or may not be salaried officers. The salary of any county, city, town, or municipal officer shall not be increased or diminished after his election or during his term of office, nor shall the term of any such officer be extended beyond the period for which he is elected or appointed.'

Other provisions cited as indicative of the general policy of the framers of the Constitution are section 25 of article 3, which provides that the 'compensation for state officers shall not be increased or diminished during the term for which they shall have been elected,' and section 13 of article 4, which provides that the salaries of the judges of the Supreme and the superior courts 'shall not be increased after their election, nor during the term for which they shall have been elected.'

These provisions of the Constitution, it may be premised, since they are prohibitory in their nature, are self-executing binding alike upon the authority empowered to fix salaries or compensation of public officers, whether that authority be the Legislature, a board or commission, or, as in this instance, the Legislature with the concurrence of the electorate affected by the increase. It is plain also that these commissioners are public officers within the meaning of the constitutional...